I have A Question For The Republicans

[Campbell]

Why is it that after the president went along with the Republicans when they wanted to stop the automatic, built in, scheduled termination of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 that the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

This is the sorriest excuse for a house of representatives that I've ever seen....'course I'm just 79. The Tea Party extremists will completely ruin what we have and what was bought and paid for by a a lot of young blood......and I don't mean Iraq which bought nothing. 4500 young Americans died because an administration was hell bent to remove Saddam Hussein from power.......the reason? Saddam tried to assassinate Bush's daddy in 1993.

 

[Bob N]

Why is it that after the president went along with the Republicans when they wanted to stop the automatic, built in, scheduled termination of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 that the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

Because when it comes to "bi-partisanship", you will not find the word in the GOP dictionary. :mrgreen:

 

[Gardener]

Why is it that after the president went along with the Republicans when they wanted to stop the automatic, built in, scheduled termination of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 that the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

At the risk of belaboring the obvious here, I'd say the reason is that they are bastards.

selfish bastards if you want the particular species thereof.

 

[Campbell]

Because when it comes to "bi-partisanship", you will not find the word in the GOP dictionary. :mrgreen:

Their only method is attack!

 

[Excon]

Why is it that ... the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

I am not a republican, but I need to ask.
Why should they accommodate him on anything that they are opposed to?

It makes no sense for them to do so at all.

 

[Drake McHugh]

They say their is no fool like an old fool.

 

[Campbell]

They say their is no fool like an old fool.

"They Say A Lot Don't They"..........John Travolta...Pulp Fiction

 

[Campbell]

I am not a republican, but I need to ask.
Why should they accommodate him on anything that they are opposed to?

It makes no sense for them to do so at all.

What they are opposed to is the first black president. They despise the ground he walks on and it got worse after the election last year. They'll have a heart attack after Hillary is elected. I wonder who will get the **** kicked out of 'em.....Christy, Rand Paul or Cruz?

 

[Excon]

What they are opposed to is the first black president. They despise the ground he walks on and it got worse after the election last year. They'll have a heart attack after Hillary is elected. I wonder who will get the **** kicked out of 'em.....Christy, Rand Paul or Cruz?

1.) You didn't answer the question.
2.) You clearly have no idea of what you speak.

 

[Campbell]

1.) You didn't answer the question.
2.) You clearly have no idea of what you speak.

LOL....you sound like Dick Morris and Karl Rove when they predicted Romney by a landslide. Hang in there......your ship might come in but thankfully not in my lifetime

 

[Ockham]

Because when it comes to "bi-partisanship", you will not find the word in the GOP dictionary. :mrgreen:

More like: This is what you get when you pass a massive overhaul of healthcare and do not include the GOP in the process, do not consult with them, demonize them during closed door partisan sessions and then pass it with zero GOP votes.

Are people really wondering why Republicans aren't liking this law?

 

[justabubba]

I am not a republican, but I need to ask.
Why should they accommodate him on anything that they are opposed to?

It makes no sense for them to do so at all.

and if that had been the republican approach to governing, i would agree
but GOP leaders stated their intent was to oppose Obama ... to prevent his re-election
cannot say that it is because he is black, but they opposed anything he supported only because he supported it
they put party interests before national interests

 

[YoungConserv]

Because when it comes to "bi-partisanship", you will not find the word in the GOP dictionary. :mrgreen:

It seems to me the democrats idea of compromise is to give in to their plans. I bet you cant name the last time compromise lead to a conservative leaning solution?

 

[sawyerloggingon]

and if that had been the republican approach to governing, i would agree
but GOP leaders stated their intent was to oppose Obama ... to prevent his re-election
cannot say that it is because he is black, but they opposed anything he supported only because he supported it
they put party interests before national interests

And democrats did the very same thing to Bush.

 

[justabubba]

It seems to me the democrats idea of compromise is to give in to their plans. I bet you cant name the last time compromise lead to a conservative leaning solution?

dubya's big pharma bill

 

[justabubba]

And democrats did the very same thing to Bush.

the one's who voted for his massive tax break for the rich
or he one's who approved his gift program to big pharma
or maybe you are speaking of the ones who voted to authorized a war at his request, based on false premises

 

[sawyerloggingon]

the one's who voted for his massive tax break for the rich
or he one's who approved his gift program to big pharma
or maybe you are speaking of the ones who voted to authorized a war at his request, based on false premises

More like the ones who said "this war is lost" and the ones who claimed the war on terror was a distraction.

 

[bubbabgone]

but GOP leaders stated their intent was to oppose Obama

...

Consider this analogy ... if you were around prior to WWII, and you were perspicacious, or at a minimum paying attention, would you have been on firm ground opposing Adolf Hitler as der Fuhrer ?

 

[justabubba]

Consider this analogy ... if you were around prior to WWII, and you were perspicacious, or at a minimum paying attention, would you have been on firm ground opposing Adolf Hitler as der Fuhrer ?

please share with us how that is analogous with the situation under discussion

 

[bubbabgone]

please share with us how that is analogous with the situation under discussion

I shouldn't have to but I will.
You see, anyone who was so enthralled with Denzel the personality that they didn't bother to dig deeper into Denzel the Community Organizer, would never have known the evil that lurked in his heart.
And no one was around to smack 'em in the face with it.
But those that did look at what they were getting knew someone with such a background was up to no good ... and now it's been demonstrated they were right.
Comprendo?

 

[justabubba]

I shouldn't have to but I will.
You see, anyone who was so enthralled with Denzel the personality that they didn't bother to dig deeper into Denzel the Community Organizer, would never have known the evil that lurked in his heart.
And no one was around to smack 'em in the face with it.
But those that did look at what they were getting knew someone with such a background was up to no good ... and now it's been demonstrated they were right.
Comprendo?

ugh ... no
try again
and try to make some sense this time

 

[bubbabgone]

ugh ... no
try again
and try to make some sense this time

What is it you don't understand?

 

[justabubba]

What is it you don't understand?

how your post was in any way analogous

the post you are unable to show is analogous

 

[bubbabgone]

how your post was in any way analogous

the post you are unable to show is analogous

I explained it already.
Ask an adult for help.
But I must say ... your blind loyalty does conjure up a certain Obama fan type ...

 

[CanadaJohn]

Why is it that after the president went along with the Republicans when they wanted to stop the automatic, built in, scheduled termination of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 that the bastards have never accommodated him on anything he wanted to do?

This is the sorriest excuse for a house of representatives that I've ever seen....'course I'm just 79. The Tea Party extremists will completely ruin what we have and what was bought and paid for by a a lot of young blood......and I don't mean Iraq which bought nothing. 4500 young Americans died because an administration was hell bent to remove Saddam Hussein from power.......the reason? Saddam tried to assassinate Bush's daddy in 1993.

Funny - after about a month in office, the Republicans supported President Obama's stimulus package, almost $1 trillion, the largest such stimulus in American or world history, and then Obama proceeded to have no "shovel ready" jobs ready, had no strategy to improve the employment picture, seized the assets of GM and Chrysler and virtually gave the two companies to his union pals, and spent his first year in office badmouthing the Republicans for not going along with his disasterous takeover of the country's health insurance system.

What part of that record engenders any desire to work cooperatively with the fool?

Besides, Obama and the Democrats controlled all three branches of the legislative arm of government in the first two years and accomplished virtually nothing to improve the economy and brought in a health insurance law that stagnated the economy further creating the worse recovery from a recession in the history of your country.

Since the Democrat fools couldn't seem to do anything when they had all the power, why would Republicans join in their disaster by doing what they know is wrong just because Obama wants it?